ALERT: This system is being upgraded on Tuesday December 12. It will not be available
for use for several hours that day while the upgrade is in progress. Deposits to DukeSpace
will be disabled on Monday December 11, so no new items are to be added to the repository
while the upgrade is in progress. Everything should be back to normal by the end of
day, December 12.
A Common Mechanism for Perceptual Reversals in Motion-Induced Blindness, the Troxler Effect, and Perceptual Filling-In.
Abstract
Several striking visual phenomena involve a physically present stimulus that alternates
between being perceived and being "invisible." For example, motion-induced blindness,
the Troxler effect, and perceptual filling-in all consist of subjective alternations
where an item repeatedly changes from being seen to unseen. In the present study,
we explored whether these three specific visual phenomena share any commonalities
in their alternation rates and patterns to better understand the mechanisms of each.
Data from 69 individuals revealed moderate to strong correlations across the three
phenomena for the number of perceptual disappearances and the accumulated duration
of the disappearances. Importantly, these effects were not correlated with eye movement
patterns (saccades) assessed through eye tracking, differences in motion sensitivity
as indexed by dot coherence and speed perception thresholds, or simple reaction time
abilities. Principal component analyses revealed a single component that explained
67% of the variance for the number of perceptual reversals and 60% for the accumulated
duration of the disappearances. The temporal dynamics of illusory disappearances was
also compared for each phenomenon, and normalized durations of disappearances were
well fit by a gamma distribution with similar shape parameters for each phenomenon,
suggesting that they may be driven by a single oscillatory mechanism.
Type
Journal articleSubject
Troxler effectcommon timing mechanism
gamma approximation
motion-induced blindness
perceptual filling-in
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/13523Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1177/0301006616672577Publication Info
Devyatko, Dina; Appelbaum, L Gregory; & Mitroff, Stephen R (2016). A Common Mechanism for Perceptual Reversals in Motion-Induced Blindness, the Troxler
Effect, and Perceptual Filling-In. Perception. 10.1177/0301006616672577. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/13523.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Lawrence Gregory Appelbaum
Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
Greg Appelbaum is an Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and
Behavioral Sciences in the Duke University School of Medicine. Dr. Appelbaum's research
interests primarily concern the brain mechanisms underlying visual cognition, how
these capabilities differ among individuals, and how they can be improved through
behavioral, neurofeedback, and neuromodulation interventions. Within the field of
cognitive neuroscience, his research has addressed visual pe
Stephen Mitroff
Associate Research Professor in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience
NOTE: As of 8/1/2015 Dr. Mitroff and his lab will move to The George Washington University
in Washington D.C. Lab focus: My lab has an active interest in visual search—how we
find targets amongst distractors. With a dual goal of informing both academic theory
and applied "real-world" performance, we explore various influences on search. We
work with a variety of expert groups to understand the effects of experience and expertise,
and to reveal individual differences in performa
Alphabetical list of authors with Scholars@Duke profiles.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info